Legal Opinion

Fass v. Ruegg

District Court, S.D. Ohio

Decided May 25, 1965No. 3019PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WEINMAN, Chief Judge.

This matter is before the Court upon the motion of defendants for summary judgment.

This is what is commonly referred to as an employee dismissal case. The facts, briefly summarized, are as follows: Plaintiff was employed as an Aeronautical Engineer at Wright Patterson Air Force Base. He was given a Notice of Proposed Removal, dated September 18, 1962, which stated “inefficiency” as the reason for the proposed removal. On October 2, 1962, plaintiff filed a letter of reply. Thereafter, it was determined that the charge of inefficiency had not been refuted and plaintiff…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Keim v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
  2. Ex Parte Duncan N. HennenSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
  3. Parsons v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  4. Eberlein v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  5. Mary E. Seebach v. Joseph M. Cullen, District Director, Bureau of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1964

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Sacra v. RueggDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1965
  2. West v. MacYDistrict Court, S.D. Mississippi · 1968

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API